Time filter

Source Type

Houston, TX, United States

Henke L.D.,United Space Alliance LLC
AIAA SPACE Conference and Exposition 2010 | Year: 2010

The ICARE method is a flexible, widely applicable method for systems engineers to solve problems and resolve issues in a complete and comprehensive manner. The method can be tailored by diverse users for direct application to their function (e.g. system integrators, design engineers, technical discipline leads, analysts, etc.). The clever acronym, ICARE, instills the attitude of accountability, safety, technical rigor and engagement in the problem resolution: Identify, Communicate, Assess, Report, Execute (ICARE). This method was developed through observation of the Space Shuttle Propulsion Systems Engineering and Integration (PSE&I) office personnel and their approach in an attempt to succinctly describe the actions of an effective systems engineer. Additionally, it evolved from an effort to make a broadly-defined checklist for a PSE&I worker to perform their responsibilities in an iterative and recursive manner. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Systems Engineering Handbook states, "engineering of NASA systems requires a systematic and disciplined set of processes that are applied recursively and iteratively for the design, development, operation, maintenance, and closeout of systems throughout the life cycle of the programs and projects." ICARE is a method that can be applied within the boundaries and requirements of NASA's systems engineering set of processes to provide an elevated sense of duty and responsibility to crew and vehicle safety. The importance of a disciplined set of processes and a safety-conscious mindset increases with the complexity of the system. Moreover, the larger the system and the larger the workforce, the more important it is to encourage the usage of the ICARE method as broadly as possible. According to the NASA Systems Engineering Handbook, "elements of a system can include people, hardware, software, facilities, policies and documents; all things required to produce system-level results, qualities, properties, characteristics, functions, behavior and performance." The ICARE method can be used to improve all elements of a system and, consequently, the system-level functional, physical and operational performance. Even though ICARE was specifically designed for a systems engineer, any person whose job is to examine another person, product, or process can use the ICARE method to improve effectiveness, implementation, usefulness, value, capability, efficiency, integration, design, and/or marketability. This paper provides the details of the ICARE method, emphasizing the method's application to systems engineering. In addition, a sample of other, non-systems engineering applications are briefly discussed to demonstrate how ICARE can be tailored to a variety of diverse jobs (from project management to parenting). © 2010 by United Space Alliance, LLC. Source

Grabois M.R.,United Space Alliance LLC
Acta Astronautica | Year: 2011

This paper shares an interesting and unique case study of knowledge capture by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), an ongoing project to recapture and make available the lessons learned from the Apollo lunar landing project so that those working on future projects do not have to "reinvent the wheel". NASA's new Constellation program, the successor to the Space Shuttle program, proposes a return to the Moon using a new generation of vehicles. The Orion Crew Vehicle and the Altair Lunar Lander will use hardware, practices, and techniques descended and derived from Apollo, Shuttle, and the International Space Station. However, the new generation of engineers and managers who will be working with Orion and Altair are largely from the decades following Apollo, and are likely not well aware of what was developed in the 1960s. In 2006, a project at NASA's Johnson Space Center was started to find pertinent Apollo-era documentation and gather it, format it, and present it using modern tools for today's engineers and managers. This "Apollo Mission Familiarization for Constellation Personnel" project is accessible via the web from any NASA center for those interested in learning answers to the question "how did we do this during Apollo?" © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. Source

Osterlund J.,United Space Alliance LLC
AIAA SPACE Conference and Exposition 2011 | Year: 2011

A heavy lift launch vehicle that enables an architecture approach that will be affordable and sustainable should consider the following: 1) two different programmatic approaches - a direct capability vehicle and a progressive capability vehicle evolving to a pre-declared end-state, 2) a core stage concept that is standardized and configuration baselined to reduce vehicle manufacturing and production, infrastructure and processing life cycle cost growth, and 3) an evolving vehicle stack that employs an adjustable second or third stage configuration to meet customer mission requirements and objectives, resulting in tailored performance that enables satisfaction of mission goals. This paper will describe and provide the trade space and evidence of the relative benefits, impacts, and drawbacks between early heavy lift launch capability versus final configuration capability.© 2011 by United Space Alliance, LLC. Source

Stuit T.D.,United Space Alliance LLC
AIAA SPACE Conference and Exposition 2011 | Year: 2011

In preparation to provide the capability for the Orion spacecraft, also known as the Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV), to rendezvous with the International Space Station (ISS) and future spacecraft, a new suite of relative navigation sensors are in development and were tested on one of the final Space Shuttle missions to ISS. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) commissioned a flight test of prototypes of the Orion relative navigation sensors on STS-134, in order to test their performance in the space environment during the nominal rendezvous and docking, as well as a re-rendezvous dedicated to testing the prototype sensors following the undocking of the Space Shuttle orbiter at the end of the mission. Unlike the rendezvous and docking at the beginning of the mission, the re-rendezvous profile replicates the newly designed Orion coelliptic approach trajectory, something never before attempted with the shuttle orbiter. Therefore, there were a number of new parameters that needed to be conceived of, designed, and tested for this re-rendezvous to make the flight test successful. Additionally, all of this work had to be integrated with the normal operations of the ISS and shuttle and had to conform to the constraints of the mission and vehicles. The result of this work is a separation and re-rendezvous trajectory design that would not only prove the design of the relative navigation sensors for the Orion vehicle, but also would serve as a proof of concept for the Orion rendezvous trajectory itself. This document presents the analysis and decision making process involved in attaining the final STS-134 re-rendezvous design. © 2011 by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc. Source

Fiore S.M.,University of Central Florida | Wiltshire T.J.,University of Central Florida | Oglesby J.M.,University of Central Florida | O'Keefe W.S.,United Space Alliance LLC | Salas E.,University of Central Florida
Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine | Year: 2014

ntroduction: NASA's Mission Control Center (MCC) is responsible for control of the International Space Station (ISS), which includes responding to problems that obstruct the functioning of the ISS and that may pose a threat to the health and well-being of the fl ight crew. These problems are often complex, requiring individuals, teams, and multiteam systems, to work collaboratively. Research is warranted to examine individual and collaborative problem-solving processes in this context. Specifi cally, focus is placed on how Mission Control personnel-each with their own skills and responsibilities-exchange information to gain a shared understanding of the problem. The Macrocognition in Teams Model describes the processes that individuals and teams undertake in order to solve problems and may be applicable to Mission Control teams. Method: Semistructured interviews centering on a recent complex problem were conducted with seven MCC professionals. In order to assess collaborative problem-solving processes in MCC with those predicted by the Macrocognition in Teams Model, a coding scheme was developed to analyze the interview transcriptions. Results: Findings are supported with excerpts from participant transcriptions and suggest that team knowledge-building processes accounted for approximately 50% of all coded data and are essential for successful collaborative problem solving in mission control. Support for the internalized and externalized team knowledge was also found (19% and 20%, respectively). Discussion: The Macrocognition in Teams Model was shown to be a useful depiction of collaborative problem solving in mission control and further research with this as a guiding framework is warranted. © by the Aerospace Medical Association. Alexandria, VA. Source

Discover hidden collaborations